this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2026
430 points (98.2% liked)

News

35724 readers
2514 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Most workers who aren’t saving for retirement through their employers aren’t saving at all, the study found

New data suggests the average American worker has under $1,000 saved for retirement.

A report from the National Institute on Retirement Security found that the median savings for all employed adults between the ages of 21 and 64 were approximately $955. The study includes workers with 401(k) and other retirement savings plans, as well as the approximately 56 million workers who do not have access to employer-sponsored retirement plans.

Workers with retirement savings plans have a median balance of approximately $40,000 saved, according to the report. That figure is nowhere near the $1.5 million that Americans say they need to feel comfortable fully retiring.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] pyre@lemmy.world 25 points 6 days ago

well the solution is simple: deport brown people, ban trans people and give more money and tax cuts to corporations and billionaires. it'll all be over soon.

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 25 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Fucking high rollers over there

My retirement plan is to die at work, that way my family is taken care of. (who am I kidding, my work will try to weasel out of paying them if that happens)

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Learn from the French: burn shit before you get to the point of starvation.

[–] Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

I mean, it took starvation for them to start burning shit the first time. But at least they learned from that, and haven’t let it get as bad since then.

This is simply Americans’ first time experiencing the wrong side of the “let them eat cake” thing, so of course it’ll take a long time for America to start lighting things on fire.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Your family will be lucky to get a pizza party.

[–] robocall@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

The pizza dough contains potassium bromate which may be carcinogenic

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 19 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Lots of people saying it's a skill issue that people aren't saving more of their earnings. The problem is much deeper: it doesn't make sense for the majority of Americans to save their money. This is the rational outcome of a political and economic system that does not offer hope, only cynicism.

[–] MousePotatoDoesStuff@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

If it was a handful of people, it could MAYBE be a skill issue. But when it's most people, it's a systemic issue.

[–] hardcoreufo@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

I had an argument about that with the college when I failed ochem. 2/3 of the students failed ochem that year. My argument was basically they made the tests too hard just to weed people out because I aced the lab class and always had As on my papers. Papers where you performed real world calculations not insane ones. There reply was basically yeah its a weed out class take it again or switch majors but we'll let you keep your scholarship... for now. Kept major, switched schools a year later then switched majors.

[–] BanMe@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I had several 401ks, I cashed them out fairly quickly because an emergency would come along and it was the only thing between me and homelessness, or not receiving medical care.

Now I have a 403(b) because I work for higher ed, and I am forbidden to cash it out, but I've taken a loan against it and paid off my credit cards, and am paying myself interest now.

So now I have my CCs freed up for the next time I have an emergency, which will be checks watch

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 days ago

I had almost completely strip-mined my 401k and post-tax investments by the time I was 56 due to a family member's mental-health crisis and the downstream impact of that (it was worth it: the family member in question is now stable and thriving). I'm now 70 and should be able to retire next year if some other emegency doesn't bite us on the ass before then. It took 14 years to rebuild, and that was with my wife and me both bringing in professional salaries and having additional investments.

[–] Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 6 days ago

I feel the "checking watch for next emergency"

I'm just about done paying off my last emergency so I'm right on time for the next big one. Fate seems to wait until I'm spitting distance from paying it off to taunt me or some shit.

The last time I was literally 1 month from having it paid off before BOOM $10k medical emergency and to not become homeless due to said medical emergency combined with being on FMLA for 12 weeks minus a day.

It don't like like a lot to some but for me it's been hell.

[–] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 10 points 6 days ago (1 children)

JFC this is depressing. Hopefully it forces some change though. I like that post about the French boyfriend asking why we don't burn shit. Hunger will make people burn shit.

[–] MeThisGuy@feddit.nl 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

6 meals away from anarchy or sumthin

[–] titanicx@lemmy.zip 6 points 6 days ago

I sure wish I had 955$ saved!

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Social Security was the single greatest transfer of wealth from employers to employees in US history

[–] notgold@aussie.zone 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 days ago

That's why the Repulicans hate it so much.

[–] Stiffneckedppl@lemmy.world 88 points 1 week ago (9 children)

I'm sure the situation is dire, but I'm not sure it communicates an accurate picture by lumping in 21 year olds with people who've been in the workforce for decades.

21 yr olds who are just entering the workforce or are in college aren't expected to have much, if any, retirement savings at that stage in their lives.

A better picture would be to break it down by age group. Still not a pretty picture, I'm sure.

[–] straycatstrut@discuss.tchncs.de 53 points 1 week ago (2 children)

They've done that in the research, it's just a clickbait headline with very, very light details. After following a few clicks I found the PDF [1] in which they break it apart by many groups and factors (age, race, savings plan, income, student loan debt, all sorts of stuff) and that $955 figure falls under the "workers who do not have $1 in a DC" (meaning workers with no access to a savings plan). For those with access, the number is $40,000 average.

[1] https://www.nirsonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/NIRS_2026-Retirement-in-America-FINAL.pdf

[–] evenglow@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago (3 children)

For those with access, the number is $40,000 average.

Which is both in the article and OP summary.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] BillyClark@piefed.social 63 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Without universal healthcare, even if you save millions, it can all be wiped out with a single illness.

[–] mrmisses@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

Health insurance companies are counting on it. Delay deny depose

[–] 9488fcea02a9@sh.itjust.works 42 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The rest of the world cannot comprehend such freedom

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago (4 children)

And you guys don't have a state pension either, right?

You guys really need to get on with a revolution. Work until you die is kinda supposed to be something we are moving away from

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 week ago

Garbage.

Tell me the average of all people who have more than zero (and the number that represents), then tell me how many have zero.

This number 955 doesn't mean shit.

[–] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (4 children)

If your employer offers a 401(k) match, not trying to take advantage of that is one of the absolute dumbest financial moves you can make. Yes, I understand people sometimes can’t that’s why I said “try”.

Another move is not investing early. The biggest boost to wealth in retirement is start saving early to take advantage of compounding interest.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

This is a terrible stat. Taking the people who are entering the workforce and averaging them with people who have spent a lifetime working. Not only that, but that’s just “retirement” savings. How many 20 year olds have retirement accounts?

The information would be far more realistic if it were grouped by decade of life.

Edit: Here. This is a little better

Savings

Retirement savings

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Still very bleak. Nobody is retiring comfortably on $60k, much less $10k.

Might be worth factoring in SS, as that's the real practical retirement savings people rely upon.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 days ago

The $60k represents remaining savings at age 80-89.

Look at the 60-69 column for what people have around the time they start retiring. But not that those are means, not median figures, so are skewed by the US's vast levels of inequality.

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

If by "average," they mean "mean," that's not a useful figure, since it's skewed by the disproportionate rewards going to the rich. And that's what that chart looks like. There's no way that the median for US people in their 60s is anywhere near $200k unless that involves some bullshit like imputing an NPV to their social security entitlement.

OK, so I did some searching.

Here's a more informative set of stats and charts: https://dqydj.com/retirement-savings-by-age/

The age 60-64 median according to their more rigorous methodology is $10,400, not $200k.

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Median, not average, so much better at showing this situation than mean but it's still not great. I agree that it should be broken up, but the difficulty is how you define the grouping will have a significant impact on the results, especially in early and later years.

I'd prefer median by age graphed by age. Average by any grouping will skew heavily if there is a lot of variance, and I absolutely expect there is in the US. A box-and-whisker plot could also be ideal here, but you still have the grouping problem.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 13 points 1 week ago (19 children)

How and why would you save as someone in the US? This country is collapsing.

[–] Stiffneckedppl@lemmy.world 27 points 1 week ago (6 children)

You can invest in international markets if you think the US market is doomed. Still not a reason not to save. The bigger problem is that so many people simply can't afford living expenses AND saving for retirement.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›